Sanctuary : a politics of ease?

Abstract

Over the last decade, sanctuary has been evoked as an alternative to the problems associated with an exclusionary statist asylum regime. In Canada, the United States, and Europe, a “cities of sanctuary” movement has emerged, articulated through various political vocabularies. This movement conceives of sanctuary not simply as a church-based site where asylum seekers may be secured but offers a host of welcoming practices within and beyond cities. This article specifically explores the UK-based City of Sanctuary movement, with a focus on the case of Glasgow, which has widely been read as exemplifying hospitality toward an empowerment of asylum seekers. It has been argued that while a statist discourse of fear—a “politics of unease”—posits migrants as a threat to be policed, the City of Sanctuary stimulates a softer approach. Yet, this article illustrates how the City of Sanctuary is also mobilizing a deeply troubling “politics of ease.” Based on an ethnographic investigation, I show how a politics of ease renders intractable the serious problem of protracted waiting that many controls many asylum seekers. In doing so, I demonstrate how the seemingly hospitable City of Sanctuary in fact contributes to a hostile asylum regime by indefinitely deferring and even extending a temporality of waiting.